Helping Baby Boomers to continue to earn income, as long as they want

Interviews

06/25/2017

If this is how Megyn Kelly is playing out for the 7:00 P.M. NBC slot, god help the network when she's doing the 9:00 A.M. one in the fall.

Her glam and lack of audience connection are bad fits for prime time.

They will be a disaster for the morning when we are on only on our second cup of coffee.

This evening's "Sunday Night" had been even weaker than the disappointing interview with Alex Jones (which had much lower ratings that "60 Minutes" that evening).

The programming started out with the South Florida scamming of addicts, insurance companies and taxpayers.

Supposed treatment, which takes place in mostly 400 poorly supervised sober houses, can cost between $600K and $1 million. Yet few recover. Too many die. Fatal overdoses have become the new normal in Palm Beach County.

While that may be a subject of great interest for families of addicts - and addicts themselves - it's hardly a "grabber" for prime time audiences. When I was a probation officer in the Wayne County, Michigan narcotics unit, there was little compassion for addicts. There still isn't.

In contrast, "60 Minutes" featured the provocative dark side, as well as the promise, of artificial intelligence (AI). It it totally possible and not improbable that science could lose control of this disruptive force. You bet, the Frankenstein analogy came up.

Featured as part of the AI segment was robot Sophia. She adds to her knowledge base by talking with humans.

Of course, she could eventually connect the dots and become way smarter than the human species. What she does with all that is a wild card.

Other "Sunday Night" segments were penguins and the author of "Hillbilly Elegy" J.D. Vance.

While both could have been engaging, they came off as lacking production pacing and expert editing. As with the Erin Andrews' interview two weeks ago, there was a feeling of "hey, this is going on and on."

Unlike the hosts and interviewers on "60 Minutes," Kelly seems to be incapable of hard work. Or at least demonstrating signs of having done any before coming on air. The ethos of "60 Minutes" has always been the hustle to get the story and then to showcase every aspect of it just right.

After all, she had made it not only through law school and passing the bar exam. She also nailed an associate job practicing law at the high profile, highly successful firm of Jones Day.

Then, what happened?

Did Kelly default into the then-winning Fox News partisan cable TV formula of being blonde, beautiful and with long legs? There, at least during the era of Roger Ailes, that was plenty. Well, it's not enough in network TV.

My hunch: "Sunday Night" will be replaced by a crime drama similar to "Criminal Minds" or "Blue Bloods."

This is sad. Many of us, especially women, wanted Kelly to succeed. She had stood up to the Ailes' power structure.

06/21/2017

The DailyJobCuts.com lists layoffs. Your job may have already been cited. Or soon will be.

The new normal is to be called into HR, then be directed to outplacement. That's the employer-paid service to help you, the terminated employee, transition to The Next.

Admittedly, outplacement services vary in quality and duration.

Some, especially for executives, are superior. Some are mediocre, with a lackluster track record for helping the unemployed land jobs or other kinds of sources for income such as contract work. Some last a short time. Some can go on for a year or more.

But, no matter which kind you find yourself in, the burden is on you to get the most out of the service. Based on research, conversations with outplacement experts, feedback from those in outplacement and my own experience with transition, here are 6 must-dos:

Sample all the items on the menu. For example, you might have been told your resume is excellent. However, it's in your self-interest to take advantage of the resume analysis, feedback and overhauls. The reality is that the preferred style of resumes continues to change in these turbulent times. What yours currently has in the Summary or Education/Training may be last year.

Attend sessions on entrepreneurship and contract work. Your preference may be to keep doing what you have been doing - that is, working at a full time job with benefits. But that way of earning income may be closing for you.

Ask direct questions, in an indirect way. You may sense that you will be subject to age bias in your search for the next job. The outplacement service you are assigned might not address that issue. So, you have to, in a way that doesn't put it on the defensive. You might say, "Can you give me special pointers for how a former partner in a law firm can earn a living at age 63?" That can open the door to recommendations for leveraging that background in a different sector such as public affairs or creating a resume/cover letter for contract assignments.

Exploit the opportunity for coaching. After each interview, reverse engineer each aspect with the coach. Keep pumping for feedback.

Don't make the outplacement facility a make-believe office and the other unemployed professionals your new reference group. That kind of mindset and buddy system distracts from the urgency of getting a new source of income.

Ask for guidance on possible career change. That should be part of your education in outplacement. Your next job or project may be in your current career. Lucky you. But your focus has to be on leveraging your experience in other ways, in the future.

When hundreds of my colleagues and myself were laid off from middle management in a corporate restructuring, the outplacement service re-socialized us.

We were told we could no longer depend on any organization to earn a living. Instead we had to keep building our portfolio of experience and skills. I listened. Those who didn't failed to become strategic about their careers. Their suffering was and remains enormous - and probably unnecessary.

The jury sided with her, which she hadn't counted on It also awarded her millions. Later that was settled in a confidential agreement.

And although Andrews is bouncing back she can't forgive the miscreant who posted the naked photos he took of her through a hotel door peephole. He got less than three years in the slammer. That doesn't sit right with her. She wants stiffer penalties for stalkers.

In addition, Andrews discussed her battle with cancer.

However, what was lacking in that interview was the editorial bite we experience every week with "60 Minutes." Kelly is head to head with "60 Minutes." Unless she speeds up the metabolism of her new show, she may not last long in that prime time slot. Those who were curious and tuned into her might switch back to "60 Minutes."

After the Andrews' segment, there was what I assessed as a tedious one on science.

Meanwhile on "60 Minutes" there was an expose on how Silicon Valley is allegedly juicing the key parts of our brains. The end result could be that we will all be addicted to our digital devices - forever craving more.

Many of us wanted Kelly to achieve.

She was among the few who had stood up to former head of Fox News Roger Ailes. In addition, she has real presence. Perhaps that came from her accomplishment of not only earning a law degree but landing a job in BigLaw firm Jones Day. Clearly, she is a fine role model for women.

But after tonight's slow-paced programming, I wonder if Kelly and her team have the know-how and courage to revise the format. Like "60 Minutes," it should embed conflict, controversy and tough questioning.

06/05/2017

That's when the former FBI director will testify before the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee.

ABC and CBS are interrupting their normal programming to feature it. That is an unusual move. Obviously the public is hungry to hear what Comey has to say.

The issue will be: whether the Trump Administration attempted to influence that agency's investigation of possible Russian influence on the 2016 election. For some reason, the U.S. president Donald Trump didn't leverage executive rule to shut that testimony down.

Can Comey testimony set in play the beginning of impeachment proceedings?

That isn't likely simply because the odds are against its success. At least currently. The GOP continue to control the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate.

But that could change with the mid-term elections. If voters have lost confidence in the GOP in general and Trump in particular, they can bring back the Democrats. Enough of those and impeachment could proceed.

Last night on the newly launched NBC "Sunday Night," Megyn Kelly interviewed Vladimir Putin in Moscow. He denied any interference in the 2016 election. Some contend Putin outfoxed interviewer Kelly. Putin is the ultimate politico.

Reflection: Does the Comey testimony kick off the kind of obsessive television viewing Baby Boomers did during Watergate?

05/29/2017

She is a former associate of Jones Day. Hopefully, she will present legal issues as bite-size edibles. The Trump Administration has generated plenty of complex ones we have to digest.

Meanwhile, the front lines on that are Abovethelaw's lawyers-journalists Joe Patrice and Kathryn Rubino. Patrice and Rubino serve up cognitive finger food about Trumpism's legalities or alleged violation of them.

Many of us will tune into Kelly's news show. We wonder how this glam figure from cable Fox News will fare on an old-line network. And will the programming dazzle?

Last night, surprisingly, "60 Minutes" presented three lackluster segments. None of them left us with the compulsion that we have to stick with it next Sunday.

One segment was patriotic. Another was on forest fires near residential complexes. And the third was on space exploration by private companies instead of government. The interviewing seemed amateurish.

05/15/2017

The world already knew that she would be taking over the 9 A.M. slot in the fall. That will piggyback on the established viewership for the "Today" show. Therefore, the risk is calculated.

This second slot is a lot more risky for Kelly. And NBC.

After all, she is a newbie to NBC. Will her glam attract or turn off regulars and new viewers? The Fox News audiences loved those leggy blondes. NBC loyalists are different from the regulars who tune into Fox.

Not only is she an unknown entity placed in front of NBC audiences. Added to that is the reality that this second scheduled programming is a news show to air on Sunday night, beginning in June, at 7 P.M.

That means it goes head-to-head with the popular "60 Minutes." Throughout generations, "60 Minutes" has become a viewing habit. There's no missing it. Here is the coverage of this development by the Daily Mail.

To the regulars who take in "60 Minutes," there is high confidence that what is presented is not fake news. In fact, anyone who has worked in communications at a corporation recognizes how agitated the executives in the C-Suite become if there is a possibility they will be the focus of a "60 Minutes" segment.

Can glam Kelly bring that same credibility and build that same trust as the interviewers on "60 Minutes?"

04/15/2017

A tragic side effect of capitalism is this: Our job is the platform for our brand.

When superhero Jack Welch was no longer head of GE, the shelf life on his brand quickly expired.

Welch tried to extend that through book publishing, lecturing, starting an online business-management degree program and even helping out Team Trump with the transition. But, the Welch Brand belongs to history, not the present.

The same fate has befallen the Preet Bharara brand.

The stunner is that he really was his job. When the Trump Administration fired him, there was a flurry of media coverage. But essentially Bharara became just another guy who had had a big job and lost it. In that corridor of Paradise Lost - outplacement - we meet up with so many of them.

Oh, Bharara did land a teaching gig at the New York University Law School. And he did get a bit of attention with his provocative THE NEW YORK TIMES interview. He used the phrase "helter-skelter" to describe the political regime which fired him.

However, Trump still has the big job of president. And Bharara only has a little job. That's the reality. And the brands tell the tale.

Be prepared for these players to also experience the expiration of their shelf life if they lose their jobs:

Steve Bannon (He could be banished from the West Wing)

Elizabeth Warren (Her re-election is iffy)

Bill O'Reilly (Without his employment at Fox News, which could end, who would want to buy his books).

The same sort of dynamic takes over when a big brand doesn't land the job needed to keep feeding the beast. Among the losers are:

Hillary Clinton (Please save us from any more coverage)

Chris Christie (Being drug czar wasn't the job he was supposed to have)

Sarah Palin (Things just didn't work out)

What's the solution? Establish your own business. And make it keep growing just as Jeff Bezos is pulling off at Amazon.

Players have more control over their branding in self-employment than in The Job. That's the way it has always been. Inventor Henry Ford didn't take the top job at GM when it became a competitor. He knew.

03/21/2017

"The Trump administration issued a new travel restriction on bringing large electronics in carry-on luggage on direct flights to the U.S. from 10 airports in eight Muslim-majority countries on Tuesday." - April Glaser, Recode, March 21, 2017. Here is the article.

Say, I am the typical professional dependent on my laptop for most work-related tasks and recognize how risky it is to allow that laptop to be part of checked baggage. I am an American communications experts flying back to the U.S. from an assignment in the United Arab Emirates.

Because of this new regulation, my ability to get work done will be restricted to my smartphone. Not nimble with my fingers, that's always been a challenge to me.

Meanwhile, as I struggle with long form on the iPhone I worry if my suitcase containing the laptop will be lost. The last time I checked baggage it was, you got it, lost. If the suitcase is not lost there is still the risk that the laptop has been damaged.

Sure, there are possible scenarios about bombs being built into laptops. But, enlightened governments would do risk analyses about the probabilities and the tradeoffs. The latter could include millions of lost hours of human productivity.

03/03/2017

Face it, in this labor market of glut of talent, employers approach hiring as a process of ruling out a whole lot of applicants.

That's why it is a big risk for you to volunteer information on the interview. Anything you say may be held against you. That's the kind of data employers are looking for. And it could knock you out of the box.

In law, as Elie Mystal points out on Abovethelaw, that's called "going beyond the scope of the question."

Lawyers comprehensively coach their clients not to do that. They hammer: Just answer the question. Don't elaborate.

Here's a concrete example how going beyond the scope of the question can eliminate you from the competition for the job.

________________________________________

Interviewer: I see here you were unemployed for three months in 2016. Please explain that absence from the workforce.

Smart You; (What you should say) There was a medical emergency in my family.

Dumb You: (What you should not say) I invested in myself by checking in a great rehab. I will always be grateful for that opportunity.

________________________________________

Of course, the context is very different if the question is about the specifics of how you get results for employers or clients.

In that situation, you need to provide concrete details about what the outcomes were and how you (preferably the team) achieved them. Then, you could briefly sketch out how you also could get results for this particular employer or client. But do that without putting the knock on what the organization is currently doing.

Interviews are no different from the performance art actors roll out on the stage, in film and on television. You have to be totally aware of how each word is being received. The body language and facial gestures should help generate the impact you intend to make.

03/02/2017

In the new economy, continually turbulent, many of us are forever searching for work. That might be full-time, part-time, contract or clients for our enterprise.

What goes along with that is THE INTERVIEW.

Each one involves plenty of planning and performance art. Because of the extreme glut of talent in myriad fields, most of them will not pan out in a job offer.

Well, it could help our sense of self to get it while the interview is taking place that this ordeal will not generate an offer.

Just as in poker, in the interview process there are "tells." They tip us off what is really going on in the interviewers' mind and heart.

Here are the 5 major ones:

Widened eyes or slight drop of the jaw. That usually occurs when we enter the room. We might provide a shock because we are over-50, of a certain ethnic or racial group and/or dressed inappropriately or too-well.

Nervousness +. Interviewers know all about EEOC regulations. They don't want to brush up against them. So they are on hyper-alert not to do anything wrong. They have long made up their mind they are not going to hire us. And they are full of anxiety that we will pick up on their bias.

One Millennial interviewer, clearly annoyed that she had to put up with this over-50er, dropped the folder in which were my credentials. In addition to the angst was a bit of rage.

Too much detail. To seem engaged in vetting us they will pile on copious details about the nuts and bolts of the position or even the opportunities for upward mobility. While they are doing that they often lean in.

Involuntary facial twitch. When I was explaining my need for income, the interviewer's assistant's facial muscle twitched. I knew I was finished.

Ensuring they have your correct contact information. That is all down on the resume they are holding. There is no need to verify. At that point, we have to maintain impulse control. No, we don't want to let loose that they wasted our time and hopes.